Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 4/5] libbpf: Add SEC name for xdp programs attached to device map

[Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>]

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 5:17 PM David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Support SEC("xdp_dm*") as a short cut for loading the program with
> type BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP and expected attach type BPF_XDP_DEVMAP.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>
> ---
>  tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> index 5d60de6fd818..493909d5d3d3 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> @@ -6657,6 +6657,8 @@ static const struct bpf_sec_def section_defs[] = {
>                 .expected_attach_type = BPF_TRACE_ITER,
>                 .is_attach_btf = true,
>                 .attach_fn = attach_iter),
> +       BPF_EAPROG_SEC("xdp_dm",                BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
> +                                               BPF_XDP_DEVMAP),

naming is hard and subjective, but does "dm" really associate with
DEVMAP to you, rather than "direct message" or "direct memory" or
something along those line? Is there any harm to call this
"xdp_devmap"? It's still short enough, IMO.

>         BPF_PROG_SEC("xdp",                     BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP),
>         BPF_PROG_SEC("perf_event",              BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT),
>         BPF_PROG_SEC("lwt_in",                  BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_IN),
> --
> 2.21.1 (Apple Git-122.3)
>